Remember That War On Christmas Meme?

Have you noticed that when Dems are in charge every year about Christmas we hear some psycho babble about the War on Christmas?

It is truly just Right wing bullshit!

But in reality there was a war on Christmas but it was not here in the US but rather in England many generations ago.

And yes this is a sneaky way to introduce some history to my readers.

The war occurred during the days of Oliver Cromwell in the 17th century……it seems that some wanted Christmas carols and such banned for the public……

When it comes to revolutionary protest songs, what springs to mind? Billie Holliday’s Strange Fruit? Bob Dylan’s Blowin’ In The Wind? Sam Cooke’s A Change is Gonna Come? I’m guessing the humble Christmas carol is probably low on your list of contenders, but in mid-17thCentury England, during the English Civil War, the singing of such things as The Holly and the Ivy would have landed you in serious trouble. Oliver Cromwell, the statesman responsible for leading the parliamentary army (and later Lord Protector of England, Scotland and Ireland), was on a mission to cleanse the nation of its most decadent excesses. On the top of the list was Christmas and all its festive trappings.

Since the Middle Ages, Christmas had been celebrated in much the same way as today: 25 December was the high holy day on which the birth of Christ was commemorated, and it kicked off an extended period of merriment, lasting until Twelfth Night on 5 January. Churches held special services; businesses kept shorter hours; people decorated their homes with holly, ivy and mistletoe; acting troupes put on comedic stage plays (prefiguring the modern pantomime); taverns and taphouses were brimming with merrymakers; and families and friends came together to gorge themselves on special food and drink including turkey, mince pies, plum porridge and specially-brewed Christmas ale. And communal singing about the season was all the rage.

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20141219-when-christmas-carols-were-banned

A closer look at Cromwell’s government……

It is a common myth that Cromwell personally ‘banned’ Christmas during the mid seventeenth century. Instead, it was the broader Godly or parliamentary party, working through and within the elected parliament, which in the 1640s clamped down on the celebration of Christmas and other saints’ and holy days, a prohibition which remained in force on paper and more fitfully in practice until the Restoration of 1660. There is no sign that Cromwell personally played a particularly large or prominent role in formulating or advancing the various pieces of legislation and other documents which restricted the celebration of Christmas, though from what we know of his faith and beliefs it is likely that he was sympathetic towards and supported such measures, and as Lord Protector from December 1653 until his death in September 1658 he supported the enforcement of the existing measures.

https://www.olivercromwell.org/faqs4.htm

So you see the only war on Christmas has been many years ago and it was in the UK not Main Street USA

So can we please stop spreading bullshit in the name of Christmas….there is already more and enough in the media.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

“lego ergo scribo”

Court Packing

Now that Biden has been elected the yells about so-called “court packing” will commence….that is as soon as his cabinet nominees are in place.

Court Packing is what the GOP is calling the idea of expansion of SCOTUS…..

Court packing means adding judges to a court, and in this case, adding justices to the Supreme Court. The Constitution does not specify how many justices must sit on the bench, so Congress can change the number from the current nine simply by passing a law. If the president signs it, they would then have another seat to fill.

The number of justices has occasionally changed at different points in history. The court started off with six, George Washington–nominated judges, a number that shifted with the political tide for the next eight decades. As the Washington Post reports, “In the Civil War era, the court expanded and shrank like an accordion,” with Republicans under Lincoln adding a seat in 1863, then constricting the bench to seven people to keep Andrew Jackson from adding to it. We’ve had nine justices since 1869, when Congress gave President Ulysses S. Grant two vacancies to fill. But in 1937, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt unsuccessfully attempted to expand the bench to seat up to 15 people, proposing that one new justice be added for each existing member over 70 who refused to step down.

The first question that pops to mind is….is it constitutional?

My views on the constitutionality of court packing have evolved. I used to believe that it was clearly constitutional under the Constitution’s original meaning, even though it was a pernicious practice that should strongly be resisted. But I have changed my mind. I now believe that it is unclear whether court packing is constitutional under the original meaning. Although my argument does not have a clear conclusion, the possibility that court packing might be unconstitutional is significant because virtually everyone else seems to think it is constitutional.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to increase the number of Supreme Court justices, and it does not appear to restrict the reasons why Congress may increase that number. Thus, Congress may increase the number of Supreme Court justices, even if its purpose is to change how the Supreme Court resolves cases.

Is Court Packing Constitutional?

Now that is subject has been looked at….is court packing not what the GOP is doing by selecting only conservative judges?

Are they rushing to confirm a Trump Justice simply for the legal advantage of tipping the court in favor of an (increasingly hardline) conservative agenda? Yes. Are they proposing we play with the numbers on the bench in order to achieve their goal? No, not right now; right now, they are explicitly seeking a nine-Justice court, with an eye toward securing a favorable ruling in the case of a contested election. So, not court packing, but not exactly the objectivity and fairness one hopes for in a democracy.

We now have a new president and VP….what do they think of this issue?

Democratic nominee Joe Biden said last year that he thinks court packing is “political football” and “a bad idea,” one that would “come back to bite us.” In the wake of Ginsburg’s death, however, he has increasingly avoided specifics on the subject, saying at the presidential debate in late September, “Whatever the position I take on that, that will become the issue.” Last week, he told reporters that the public “will know my opinion on court-packing when the election is over,” and separately refused to elaborate, declining “to play his game,” referring to Trump.

Kamala Harris, by contrast, has addressed court-packing directly. In March 2019, Senators Harris, Warren, and Kirsten Gillibrand told Politico that court-packing was one possible check on McConnell’s efforts to push the judiciary to the right. “We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” Harris said. “We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”

At the vice-presidential debate, Harris didn’t give a clear answer on court-packing at all. “The American people deserve to make the decision about who will be the next president of the United States, and then that person can select who will serve for a lifetime on the highest court of our land,” she responded to Pence’s question on the topic. She then shifted the conversation to Trump’s many judicial selections, saying: “Do you know that of the 50 people who President Trump nominated to the courts for lifetime appointments, not one is Black? This is what they’ve been doing. You want to talk about packing the courts, let’s have that discussion.”

Both are Centrists cowards and will not commit to anything progressive….

I am for expansion to 13 justices…..retirement after 70…..and a term of 12 years leadership to be by seniority…..of course since I am an opinionated SOB I have lots to say about SCOTUS…..https://lobotero.com/2020/09/25/i-have-lots-to-say-about-scotus/

To Make SCOTUS Better?

Be Samrt!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”